Senators split on health care's effect on climate bill

Does the Democrats' victory on the sweeping health care overhaul help or hurt prospects for a big Senate climate and energy bill this year?



On Capitol Hill, it depends who you ask.



Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), one of three architects of the brewing bipartisan Senate climate plan, has warned that it hurts.

He recently said use of budget reconciliation to complete the health plan will “poison the well” for subsequent bills, because Republicans are so angry about Democratic tactics (see posts here and here on this).



But Sen. Robert Casey (D-Pa.) tells The Hill Thursday that the health care victory bodes well for the climate and energy effort. “I think it does [help] because it shows that even in this environment, we can get something substantial done, a big bill, a big public policy initiative,” he said.

By “this environment,” Casey says he means the combination of factors including partisanship, procedural challenges to many bills, the sour economy, and the looming mid-term elections.

“I don’t underestimate that it is going to be a challenge, but if you had to make a judgment call, nest positive-net negative, I’d say it is net positive,” he said.

Graham is working on a broad climate and energy bill with Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.).

Maybe the passage of health care legislation – the most sweeping Democratic social policy bill in decades – doesn’t affect the landscape on climate all that much at all.

At least that’s the view of Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.).

“I think it is one thing at a time here,” she tells The Hill. “I think that the success of an energy bill will depend on how the new effort by Graham and Kerry and Lieberman is received.”

“I think it is independent of health care,” she continued. “The energy bill by its nature will have to have at least some bipartisan support.” She didn’t say more, but positions on energy policy break to some extent along regional lines, not just party loyalty.